Joined on Sep 22, 2011


Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5
In reply to:

Turbguy1: What REALLY is going to happen, is Kodak's R&D on improvement to analog photography will cease. Film will still be available at ever increasing cost, but things certainly ain't gonna get much better from here on out. And production quality will probably suffer in the hands of a new owner.

Meanwhile, digital photography will keep advancing, and we really haven't seen anything yet!

I think the gentleman with antimosity against Apple has possible issues related to America as a nation..and is projecting his isdues at Apple an easy target. Psych eval. May help and offer assessment and plan.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2012 at 19:00 UTC
In reply to:

Larry Winters: I can't beieve the CEO of Kodak Antonio Perez is still there AND getting paid as he is personally responsible for much of Kodaks demise.

The news has conveniently forgot to mention that Kodak was offered a couple billion several years ago for their patents but the CEO Perez thought they were worth far more, so declined the offer. Now he thought they were still going to get a premium in Bankruptcy? The guy is flat out incompetent. Not to mention he failed to understand that film really was next to dead. He also failed to hire people to implement those patents into viable products which would have been worth MUCH more.

The Kodak demise would make a perfect book on what not to do as a CEO. And to think this moron Perez is going to someday get a golden parachute retirement when he does leave. All while the common shareholders get screwed. The American way as they say.

I agree 110.. % with your comment. Couldnt have said it better myself. I was questioning this ceo's decisions for few years. Yes the american way....

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2012 at 18:51 UTC
In reply to:

Jun2: put some diamond and gold. The rich will buy.

There is an old saying my dad use to say: "you cannot put a spit-shine on a terd"

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2011 at 03:01 UTC
In reply to:

krassphoto: Omg, do they really expect anyone to buy it? They should've made it in solid gold. At least it would be a better investment.

when a company's marketing department realizes that they have an overpriced, inferior product (compare to canon, nikon and olympus products in its price range) they will 'spin-doctor' such gimmics to simply get headlines and reviews. Sigma will not a competitive edge anytime soon...or will eventually be bought out or fade away from the digital DSLR market, sticking to lenses.

Link | Posted on Oct 13, 2011 at 03:00 UTC
On article Nikon J1 real-world samples gallery (336 comments in total)

Its easy to get lost in comparisons of 'sharpness' and 'quality' when you benchmark cameras against each other. The initial benchmark that needs to be established in with the tried and true 35 mm format that was popular years ago. I think today's pocket cameras are constantly being rushed to the market..a marketing department approach. There is such a vast range of quality all all price points. All additional features of video and such distract from what ultimately makes a good camera at any price point: Optics, Build Quality and Ultimately the results (influenced by 'in-camera' processing). Older point and shoot 35 mm cameras could produce incredible prints up to 20 x 30 based on the film utilized, (asa 50, 64 or 100) - and of course, optics. This fact needs to be kept in mind even though we have progressed to a digital era. Then we would have a proper perspective in conducting reviews and making assessments. Just a primer for thought....

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2011 at 23:01 UTC as 54th comment | 1 reply
Total: 5, showing: 1 – 5